You have access to this content through your organization’s enterprise subscription to the Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN). Would you like to go there now? Your choice will be remembered until you close your browser.

Opinion: What Is Missing From North Korean Nuclear Discussion

How should the U.S. and its allies deal with the nuclear-armed missile threats from North Korea? To answer that effectively, shouldn’t we first determine why there is a threat?
Tom Reed, former President Ronald Reagan’s deputy national security advisor, had an answer. In his 2009 book, The Nuclear Express, he explained that in 1980 China decided to help proliferate and finance nuclear weapons technology to its allies, including North Korea.
That is the origin of North ...

SUBSCRIBE TO ACCESS THIS ARTICLE

"Opinion: What Is Missing From North Korean Nuclear Discussion" is part of Aviation Week & Space Technology’s subscription package.

Subscribe now to read this full article. And by subscribing, you'll also receive full coverage of what's next in technology from the experts trusted by the global aerospace & defense community.

Bill Clinton committed treason when he GAVE the Loreal Missile Targeting software to the ChiComs. But in typical fashion, the media did not hype this, so Clinton got away with it. And we are worse-off because of this.

What is missing from this article was mentioning of a Chinese statement that they would come to the aid of the DPRK if they were attacked first, but would not if DPRK attacked first. That, more than anything, shuts off virtually all US military options.

The U.S. has to put pressure on China. Tactical nukes re introduced to South Korea, with a short flight time to Beijing. North Korea is a Chinese client state. What about openly encouraging the Japanese and South Koreans to go nuclear? Ramp up severe trade sanctions on China till they cut off oil shipments to North Korea. Negotiating with the North Koreans has proven to be nothing but a fool's errand. The North Koreans will want to hang on to their nukes in any negotiations, and an agreement will lend legitimacy to their keeping nukes.

“The fallout of using VX (a highly toxic chemical warfare agent) in the Feb. 13, 2017 assassination of Kim Jong Nam (half brother of Kim Jong-un) at Kuala Lumpur International airport could turn out to be significant for the country."

"Malaysian police found VX on his eyes and face.”

"Some say North Korea, in bringing a U.N.-classified weapon of mass destruction to kill a man at a busy international airport, intended to show the world what it can do with chemical weapons, 'which are easily forgotten amid concerns about the country’s advancing nuclear missile technologies'."

"South Korea’s military believes North Korea has one of the world’s largest stockpiles of chemical weapons with up to 5,000 tons that include sarin, mustard, tabun and hydrogen cyanide, in addition to V-type nerve agents."

-----

Just speculation, but Kim Jong-un 'could' have caches of these WMD's spread around the world in strategic locations. If he is threatened too much, or attacked, the operators of these caches could be under orders to release them. World leaders know this; blackmail and extortion are old tools of global politics: Hitler did it, Stalin did it, Mao Zedong did it, his grandfather and father did it, et al; why can't Kim Jong-un?

I question the claims about Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Stalin, of course, used assassination teams and Hitler had his (generally exaggerated) fifth columns, but, by my purely personal standards, these don't qualify as WMDs. I am dubious about calling a small bomb a weapon of mass destruction. I think sometimes our very own CIA just might have handed out weapons to rebels, leaving aside support of repressive regimes in power.

Of course the hope would be that following regime collapse, the new guys (military might be willing to dial down the conflict in exchange for extensive aid. You might even have someone who carried about the people of North Korea. (Compare Germany in the 90s). The concern would be whether regime collapse would lead to open warfare.
I'm not sure how much pressure we can put on China. We want to get fairer economic treatment from them and putting this into the mix in the form of (additional) economic threats may not be very productive hypothetical approach.
Also, the lack of stability and gravitas at the top, does not help. Sometimes you can get what you want by acting crazy, but there are severe limits to this approach.

And if Kim wakes up one morning and decides to hit Guam or L.A. or Tokyo, etc. with an NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) warhead, do we just write off the target? Nukes in the hands of the Russians or Chinese are of limited concern (so long as WE maintain our deterrence Triad), as their leaders are sane, and don't want their own people annihilated. With the way Kim treats his own people, that thought process probably doesn't apply! The other danger with NoKo nukes is the potential to sell/give them to Iran or other terrorists! What happens if Japan decides it has had enough of Kim's rockets overflying Japan, and shoots one of the "test" rockets down? Does he then kit Japan with a nuke?
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, I was praying that the Russians had control of the missiles, as I didn't think Khrushev would start WWIII. It turned out that the Cuban military had control of the MISSILES, but, fortunately a Russian colonel had control of the warheads and in spite of Cuban requests refused to turn the warheads over! No such safeguards available in North Korea!

Seems the way to get China to take care of this problem, which they created decades ago. Is to start discussing with S. Korea, Taiwan, and Japan about arming them with nuclear weapons (so they can defend themselves). I am sure the talk will be all it takes.

I like the Chinese government's proposal to trade North Korea's nuclear and missile tests for USA/South Korea's massive and continual 'training exercises' on North Korea's borders. Neither activity has a legitimate military rationale and ending both would dial back the tension in the region. In the longer term, more fully integrating North Korea into ongoing global trade would do more to moderate their behavior than continuing to isolate them.

It would seem it is high time to urge S. Korea to develop/deploy a massive counter-artillery capability. A networked/distributed phalanx array.

Until Seoul can defend itself against the conventional attack already posed against them, they will remain hostage.

NK keeps promises for as long as it suits them. Considering stopping the joint exercises is fine, provided you are ok with paying over and over again for the same thing. What will we give them next time?

There is no possibility of reaching a long term settlement with China. They are a combination of 2000+ of imperial dynasties, 500 years of the earlier Warring States period, leftover scraps of messianic communism, and a mixture of their Middle Kingdom mentality and good old-fashioned 19th century nationalism. We, on the other hand, come from the branch of the West that produced Greek democracy-not so successful, but you have to start somewhere-the Magna Carta, the 1689 British Declaration of Parliamentary Rights, the US Declaration of Independence, and the US Constitution. The CCP has had it in for the USA ever since Chinese student put up their Paper Maiche "Goddess of Democracy" in Tiananmen Square in 1989. Build up the USN, push through all the mods for Tomahawks, and the SM 6 and SM2 missiles, and get those lasers, rail guns, HVP projectiles, and all those robots into service ASAP. We're going to need them. It also may help to get the US economy growing at its standard 3% GDP rate again, too.

Sadly, how to respond to a fool with nukes is a conundrum. China certainly has been duplicitous. Not only concerning NK, but also on Trade. Of course American Presidents and Congress being stupid ignoring the economic side as well as the Digital Warfare China has declared on us only serves to box us in. No good answers......Japan, frankly, would be stupid NOT to develop a good number of smaller nukes.

I have been in several UN-missions to North-Korea in the 90-ties. My experience had been that apart from the ideological hardliners in the government, there were quite a number of reasonable government officials with whom we could make deals (e.g. Ministry of Trade). I have tried in my food security assessment reports to draw a realistic picture of the situation and propose market oriented approaches. These were accepted by the government but - probably under USA pressure - not by the UN. I had been astonished how openly I could discuss rather sensitive economic matters with government. Many "official data" were only a smoke-screen, and were as such quietly accepted by my government counterparts. My conclusion: North-Korea only can be changed from inside-out by dealing with pragmatic people inside the government - not unlike West-Germany did with East-Germany in the 80-ties.

The comments made by Mr. Peter Huessy are troublesome. In essence he condemns America for maintaining a strong military presence throughout the world. Does he forget we are now in the process of rebuilding our military due to the past eight years of total neglect demonstrated by Obama and his administration.

America is not at fault for North Korea and their quest for nuclear superiority. America is the strongest nation on earth that continues to join forces with our allies and protect those that believe in a free society. Simply stated, America is a magnificent country. Mr. Huessy echos the years of past apology tours undertaken by Mr. Obama. As once demonstrated by the great President Ronald Reagan, I'm pleased that we now have a leader who believes in America and the greatness of our military men and women.

Imanions comments of 9/27 completely missed the point of my 9-18 essay. The points I was making about the dominant media and professional narratives about North Korea and China was that they are FALSE and thus as a consequence let china completely off the hook re their culpability for the DPRK nuclear and missile programs. That was precisely the point of referencing Tom Reed's 2009 book on nuclear proliferation and especially his correct look at China's dangerous pro-proliferation record. I worked for Ronald Reagan and successfully help lead the effort to fully modernize our nuclear deterrent especially the PK and INF missiles. I still am helping to lead the new modernization effort we are finally once again undertaking.
Peter Huessy

Inside the Knowledge Center

Get key insights from Aviation Week Network’s annual Workforce Study about the state of the A&D industry’s workforce. Learn about the industry’s ability to meet ever-changing customer requirements through the innovation, ingenuity and capability of its people....More

In the simplest terms, airlines need to maximize the value of their aircraft by increasing profits from time in the air while decreasing the costs and time on the ground. Efficient aircraft ground operations are fundamental to meeting customer service expectations...More

In the simplest terms, airlines need to maximize the value of their aircraft by increasing profits from time in the air while decreasing the costs and time on the ground. Efficient aircraft ground operations are fundamental to meeting customer service expectations...More